| Comment Number: | OL-10508712 |
| Received: | 3/15/2005 10:15:27 AM |
| Subject: | Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Request for Comment |
| Title: | National Security Personnel System |
| CFR Citation: | 5 CFR Chapter XCIX and Part 9901 |
| No Attachments |
Comments:
Pay Banding - In general, I find it curious that the miltary would go to pay banding. With the heirarchy that we see in the military, would it not be similar to lump all privates and corporals into one pay band and all seargant's into another, as well as all lieutenants captains and majors together, and all colonels and generals in another pay band? I find it more reasonable when I need to find a chain of command in which to upwardly report, that as a GS 13, I report first to a 14 and then a 15 if needed, rather than looking for how much money someone makes to determine who is next in the chain of command. I believe that we need to be more vigilant in our attention to poor performers, however, I am not sure that pay banding is the answer. If it was the best answer, I believe that we would see that in our military ranking system already. Currently, step increases within grade are supposed to be based on performance, not an entitlement. This new system leads to the potential for everyone to get some level of pay raise every year, rather than every other year or every third year with later grades. This would lead to an overall dilution of any raises that would occur due to performance, and possibly a decrease in morale overall for those who do not receive a raise despite average performance. Perhaps if poor performers and entitlements are the problem, then we need to change how we do things within the system rather than changing the whole system. I am willing to try this new system, but am confused as to how it would work, and would like a fallback plan if it proves to be inappropriate or ineffective.